Sunday, August 22, 2010

Most Americans would back an Israeli attack on Iran

By GARY BAUMGARTEN Paltalk News Network

Perhaps it has something to do with the fears Americans have of a nuclear armed Iran. But a recent Rasmussen poll concludes that 51 percent of Americans believe the USA should help Israel if it attacks Iran.

Now, there are those who say Iran really can't turn uranium into bombs all that easily. There are others who say, Israel has nuclear arms, why not Iran?

There are others who believe that the United States is under the control of the Israelis and is only doing its bidding. Heck, some people even think the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have to do with Israel.

Others will say, Gary, you should not be reporting this because you're just beating the drum for war.

So let me be clear about my position on this.

I do not favor anyone attacking Iran. For a multitude of reasons.

An attack on Iran would solidify the nation's support behind the regime because there would then be a common enemy.

An attack on Iran would likely mean civilian casualties - no matter how careful the Israelis might be in trying to minimize it.

An attack on Iran could very well result in a response that might spill over - not just into the Middle East - but globally as those with special interests might be forced to take sides unnecessarily pitting other nations against one another.

But imagine the consequence of a nuclear-armed Iran. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would be basically worthless - at least in the Middle East. Arab nations - distrustful of Iran - would then want the Bomb as well.

And that's the most benign result.

The more serious consequences include Iran making nuclear devices available to its terrorist surrogates. Or attacking Israel directly itself.

Put yourself in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's shoes. I'd say he views this through the same kind of prism that John F. Kennedy viewed the Cuban missile crisis. Russian missiles in Cuba presented a clear and present danger to the United States. Likewise, a nuclear-armed Iran would present the same to Israel.

No, I don't favor an attack on Iran. But, as Tehran continues to move forward with its uranium enrichment program, it may give Israel no other choice. Clearly the Iranian regime knows this. So why is it moving forward?

Perhaps because it helps realize a religious prophecy that transcends what's best for the Iranian people.

I'm convinced that religion was at least a major influence in George W. Bush's decision to attack Iraq. Just as it is a major influence in Tehran's decision to move forward with its uranium enrichment program. Therein lies the problem when religious beliefs dictate civil policy. And why the two should always be separate.

Unfortunately, that's an impossibility in the Islamic Republic of Iran where religious fanatics dictate policy. And that's why, in the end, as much as I oppose it, an attack on Iran may be both inevitable and unavoidable.